The intervertebral disks of the spinal column suffer degeneration as a result of wear or of pathological changes. If conservative treatment by medication and/or physiotherapy is ineffective, surgical treatment is sometimes indicated. In this connection, it is known for a movable or immovable implant to be inserted into the intervertebral space containing the degenerated intervertebral disk. These implants take over the support function of the degenerated intervertebral disk and to this extent restore a stable bearing between the adjacent vertebrae. Immovable implants are also referred to as “cages”.
Various surgical techniques are known for implanting the cages. A traditional surgical technique involves a ventral access route, in order thereby to avoid the danger of damaging the spinal cord in the vertebral column. However, this advantage is obtained at the price of a very long access route through the abdominal cavity or thoracic cavity of the patient. Since this can cause complications, an alternative access route has become established, namely from the dorsal direction. Although the latter affords the advantage of a short route, there is the danger of collision with or damage to the spinal cord. To minimize this danger, the operation is usually performed by minimally invasive surgery. Approaches of this kind directly from the dorsal direction or more from the side are known as PLIF (posterior lumbar intervertebral fusion) or TLIF (transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion), in which the intervertebral disk is exposed from the posterior or lateral direction, respectively. Because of the small transverse incisions used in an approach by minimally invasive surgery, the size of the cage is of course greatly restricted.
For treatment using the PLIF or TLIF technique, very small cages are known. They afford the advantage of being able to be implanted by minimally invasive surgery thanks to their small size. However, an inherent disadvantage of their small size is that the support function is limited because of the small dimensions and is sometimes inadequate. Although a larger size of the cages would improve the support function, this is impractical because of the limits of minimally invasive surgery.